Comments about ‘Letter: Policy disagreement’

There is no financial support from the government authorized for abortions
except for very, very poor women when there is a severe threat to the
woman's health or in cases of tape or incest - the exact same instances
supported by your church and the same restrictions that have been in place for
over 30 years.

You don't have to like Obama, but at least be
fully informed about the issues which you disagree with him on.

I am in agreement with our current president and his policies. I am a 60 year
old active member of the church with 5 children and 15 grandchildren. I am glad
that there are still good people in the world.

There has been a law on the books since the 1970's that prevents federal
tax funds from being used to finance abortions. That law is still being
enforced. I read constantly about people complaining that their tax dollars are
being used to pay for abortions. They are not, stop worrying.

Also
you may be interested to know that the abortion rate is down by 15% since Obama
became president.

I don't think abortion is a good way to deal with a problem. The best way
to deal with unwanted pregnancy is to not get pregnant in the first place.
Ergo, birth control.

That being said, there is a good reason(s) for a
woman to terminate a pregnancy. People of good faith and intentions may argue
endlessly for what those reasons might be, but there are circumstances wherein
the pregnancy is best ended.

Therefore, I am very comfortable in
saying that this dreaded decision should be made by between that woman, her
family, her medical professional and her faith. To interject my opinion, your
opinion, or anyone else's is not the American way.

Isn't it just that you don't like this president? Abortions have been
funded by Medicaid and insurance companies since the mid-70s. What does being a
member of 'the church' and having many church callings have to do with
disagreements in abortion issues? Does free agency not factor in when it's
an issue you disagree with?

Please let me correct you, abortion services account for about 3 percent of
Planned Parenthood’s activities. That’s less than cancer screening
and prevention (16 percent), STD testing for both men and women (35 percent),
and contraception (also 35 percent). About 80 percent of Planned
Parenthood’s users are over age 20, and 75 percent have incomes below 150
percent of the poverty line. Planned Parenthood itself estimates it prevents
more than 620,000 unintended pregnancies each year, and 220,000 abortions.
It’s also worth noting that federal law already forbids Planned Parenthood
from using the funds it receives from the government for abortions.

President Obama support Planned Parenthood not abortion. Please if you will
tell us where he actually says he supports abortion.

Planned Parenthood itself isn’t about abortion. It’s primarily about
contraception and reproductive health. And if Planned Parenthood loses funding,
what will mainly happen is that cancer screenings and contraception and STD
testing will become less available to poorer people. Folks with more money, of
course, have many other ways to receive all these services, and tend to get them
elsewhere already.

The fight also isn’t about cutting
spending. The services Planned Parenthood provides save the federal government a
lot of money. It’s somewhat cold to put it in these terms, but taxpayers
end up bearing a lot of the expense for unintended pregnancies among people
without the means to care for their children.

Bruce did you oppose
Bush and his two wars for oil and the killing of nearly a million people and not
to mention seven thousand US soldiers in the last twelve years?

It's this kind of simplistic view of our politics that has led to the
destruction of the middle-class, the hijacking of the Republican Party by
extremists, and the overall lack of progress our nation is making.

I
would encourage you all to read the best-selling book, "American
Fascists" by Chris Hedges. Fascism hasn't come to America in the form
of a swastica, but in the form of the bible wrapped in the American flag.

But when you see one political party today using nationalism and
religion to take away women's rights, divide our country from the producers
and takers, and blame our narion's problems on minorities, you can see why
Germany became enchanted with this siren in the 30s and wonder just how much
further we will fall down their same path?

"When you say "radical right" today, I think of these moneymaking
ventures by fellows like Pat Robertson and others who are trying to take the
Republican Party away from the Republican Party, and make a religious
organization out of it. If that ever happens, kiss politics goodbye."

- Barry Goldwater 1994

Who would have thought that he would
be the moderate voice of reason? Heck, he would be considered a RINO today!

I don't get it. This person is older and married and has several children
and has held a bunch of volunteer positions in a religious group.

Is
this somehow supposed to give him expertise on social issues? Knowledge of the
real experience of poor women? Insight into reproductive health? A podium to
expound on legal issues?

This letter is quite disconnected, but it
seems like the writer feels personal reproductive history and volunteer record
provides a firm position from which to criticize others and criticize policies
they really don't understand and have mischaracterized.

I am an active member of the church, and as such I have served in many
positions. I think President Obama is one of the most moral men to have ever
served in the position. Do you want me to list the reasons?

Say that there was Someone who could prevent millions of abortions a year
without infringing on anyone's free agency merely by wiggling His finger,
and yet He refused to do so? Would you "disagree with His policy"? Would
you "find it difficult to appreciate" Him? Would you call Him evil, and
condemn His inaction, or would you praise and offer excuses for Him?

According to Hope Xchange, "approximately 1 in 4 pregnancies end in
miscarriage; some estimates are as high as 1 in 3. ... some estimate that 40% of
all conceptions result in loss." And the March of Dimes states that "as
many as half of all pregnancies may end in miscarriage - we don't know the
exact number because many may happen before a woman knows she's
pregnant."

All of those millions of miscarriages, also called
spontaneous abortions (naturally occurring events which have nothing to do with
medical or surgical abortions), could be prevented if Someone would only wiggle
His finger, but He declines to do so.

Yet where's the
disapproval, where's the condemnation, where's the outrage,
where's the letter to the editor?

With all due respect, and without a litany of progeny to support it, I think
President Obama is doing fine. You still don't have to get an abortion if
you don't want one, and you can serve your church if you want. But,
government is not a la carte, and we all pay for things we don't like. And,
although we can each have an opinion on the matter, there is at least half the
population that is underqualified to make reproductive health decisions for
women.

What did fetuses do to deserve death, be conceived at inconvenient time? No
one wants to go to war, but there are evil governments and war is sometimes
necessary to preserve freedom. If it wasn't for war Hitler would of been
much worse.